Wednesday, October 24, 2018

We Didn't Start the Liar

There is
such an overwhelmingly high number of incredible claims in ufology it
can be challenging to apply some context. Given that is the case, it can be frustrating when people sometimes so
adamantly demand more claims be accepted without providing adequate
supporting evidence. They'll give us the evidence later, or let us in on the big news when they're able, they tell us.

Admiral Roscoe H. Hillenkoetter served as director
of the Central Intelligence Group and CIA
from May 1, 1947 to Oct. 7, 1950,
and was on the board of governors of the
National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena
from 1957 to 1962

During
recent correspondence, a well-read UFO friend wrote that sometimes
they think modern day UFO stories began as some kind of
disinformation campaign which snowballed. Perhaps some of it involved
something genuinely intangible, but maybe the topic was manipulated
for various reasons. Everything then seemed to go crazy in the
1950's, they added, and then here we are.

I think
a solid argument can be made to that effect. People have been seeing
all kinds of things they can't explain throughout history, and their
personal conditioning determines what they think they saw. It's part
of the human experience. We're often predisposed to premature
conclusions.

Just
a few well orchestrated UFO hoaxes and state-sponsored
disinformation campaigns could effectively provide enough material to
allow future opportunists, sincere yet incorrect researchers, and
confused individuals to continue to unwittingly propagate the
stories. We see things, don't know what we saw, and fill in the
blanks based on information - accurate or otherwise - we've been
previously provided.

The
manipulation of the UFO topic since the mid 20th century
has nothing to do with what genuinely unusual phenomena may or may
not exist and have been reported throughout history. It's potentially
a completely different topic, other than the occasional possible
overlapping of reports which may involve genuinely unusual phenomena
and their misinterpretations due to widely accepted yet unsupported
assumptions.

Alien appendages, according to Robbert van den Broeke

A
significant point is verifying claims prior to accepting them as
fact. Prematurely accepting invalid claims puts us at risk of
unintentionally perpetuating hoaxes and incorrect beliefs, which
spread exponentially as we each pass them along. This stands to
detrimentally affect how others interpret their experiences, and who
they each influence in turn, and so on.

To bring
this full circle and back to where we started, there is such a high
number of sensational yet highly speculative UFO-related
circumstances it is completely unreasonable to criticize those who
request supporting evidence. I put together the following list, to
the tune of Billy Joel's We Didn't Start the Fire, of just a
small fraction of researchers who promote such circumstances, along
with a small sample of references to dubious instances. Maybe if
someone asks why I keep going on about facts and conclusive evidence,
I'll give them a link to this post and say, “Well, here are just a
few reasons, for starters."We Didn't Start the LiarMaury
Island, Groom Lake, Crop Circles, Heaven's Gate,

So you'd rather believe social media than professional biologists? My background and degrees are in biology. You've been duped if you believe this nonsense. Engage in some critical thinking occasionally when presented with ET claims, especially when they're presented or promoted by Ufology.

The sad part is that this song only covers a small part of the field. I am not familiar with the song to add verses, but anything Kerry Cassidy covers, Aura Rhanes, Giant Rock, Aura Raines, Buck Nelson, Aurora, Secret Space Program, Capt. Mark Richards, Wright Patterson, Hollomon, Jackie Gleason, Aztec, Scully, Tim Good, Howe, Reed, Santilli, Maars, Palmer, Noory . . . And that is just before I pause to take a deep breath.

I realize some may be covered under the general topics - and just saying MUFON would include a lot - but I am sure many of the people not named are wondering why they have not done enough to be included in the song. A friend, who is now deceased, might be still be complaining about not getting proper recognition. In the end, you can't please everybody and a song that went on longer than In-a-Godda-Da-Vida or Gates of Delirium might loose the audience.

I rented the latest documentary on Skinwalker Ranch this weekend (more out of curiosity on how they would spin it than anything). One moment that stood out (and there were several) was when Knapp admitted he never actually interviewed the family who lived on the ranch. Rather, he relied on the account which had already been "obtained" by NIDS. If there is a journalist version of "Come on Man!", that would be #1.

There are two aspects about NICAP that I just want to mention as I never see them adequately discussed:

1) Although Roscoe Hillenkoetter was on the board of directors of NICAP, it is often forgotten that he was also a long-time friend of Donald Keyhoe (I believe they were even roommates together at one time in their youth). So, while it is indeed suspicious the first CIA director was on NICAP's board, it could also be that it (at least) started with Keyhoe wanting him on board as someone he respected and trusted versus something more nefarious.

2) NICAP was actually founded by T. Townsend Brown who at the time felt strongly that someone had stolen his "electrogravitic (sp.) disc" idea. Brown, however, seemed to be pushing the financial resources of the group towards his own research which is why he was ousted.

Personally, I find the evidence for deception and disinformation within the UFO subject overwhelming. BUT, it seems that intelligence deception in the field only seemed to really take off in the 70s and 80s, onwards towards present day (the Holloman AFB Film, the Bennowitz ordeal, Skinwalker Ranch, etc).

Before the 70s, the argument I think is weaker (although I do not discount the mind control experimentation hypothesis that is floating around).

I have a pretty good feeling as to whom the researcher is that you are referring to Jack, and I will say that while I find their arguments towards an earlier deception (ie, 1947-1952)very intriguing, much stronger evidence is needed before a case can be made.

Remember, counter-intelligence and disruption agents are trained to use a target's belief system against itself, irrelevant of what that belief system may contain (in our discussion UFOs). But this doesn't mean that they actually created it.

I’ve read some of the arguments on the Roswell Psyop hypothesis and while I’m not 100% convinced (I still lean towards a classified project: either Mogul or some other surveillance device), it certainly wouldn’t surprise me if it turned out to just be disinformation.

Arnold is definitely the wildcard. I’ve read the analysis on Project1947s page on his sighting (the one by Martin Shough) and it seems fairly probable that he could have seen the size/speed of the objects he claimed from the distance he claimed. But, it’s also true that we only have his own word for what he claimed to see.

Still, I’ve heard the recordings of his original interviews and the guy always sounded solid. If he was involved, I think it had to be as a target rather than as someone “in the know”.

"it is completely unreasonable to criticize those who request supporting evidence."

A series of ad hoc, imperious, can't be challenged, no evidence provided to support, victim pariah, false skepticism, conclusions of finality inside a subject which you demonstrate that you possess zero depth. Only a portion of the databases of sightings and eyewitness accounts apply under your pseudo-scientific blanket of condemnation here - assembled in 8 minutes in your basement. Each of these blanket excuses you provide are only mildly inductively suggested by the evidence. Each is a statement of propaganda, truisms which you can always defend, yet never have to account for, and each of which has been falsified as a prevailing explanatory basis concerning this phenomenon. You should already know this if you were indeed competent on the subject.

You're a poet, Jack, and I didn't know it. Reading this post was painful, sad, and funny. UFO Trail consistently points out the factors and individuals within the UFO subculture that keep this intriguing field clinging to the margins of believably.

The biggest fraud of all is Gene Steinberg who’s never even seen a UFO or gone to a conference or spoke or wrote any books or interviewed anyone seriously. Yet this cockroach claims to be “the gold standard of the paranormal”. Sitting high and throwing stones on everyone’s claims yet the scammer is the biggest fraud of all. Begging for money for 15 years. You want to know who’s the poster child of UFOs and everything wrong in the field...it’s GENE STEINBERG.

Liars and believing - here’s a response from a friend about the song …

We as humans are curious by nature and most of us would like to believe in something other than our own daily plight, hence the continued belief in all things spiritual. Can debate until the cows come home but cannot prove, just have to have faith with no hard facts, and if you question the message or the authority that delivers the message............well better watch out boy, they just might vote you off the island or worse.

We should believe in the possibility of everything and only disavow when facts can prove otherwise. We want to believe, we want to believe, we want to believe in something and all the hucksters, TV preachers and con men know it. It's so easy for them because they have a willing and captive audience right from the get go.The election of the Liar in Chief is a perfect example.

While we should believe in the possibility of everything, at the same time we should question everything. Old Ben Franklin was spot on when he said " The first duty of every Citizen is to question authority" That's right Ben, if we don't question authority, authority will question us!

"The election of the Liar in Chief is a perfect example". Ironic, that this wordplay possesses the quality that is utilized by the confidence men/women you describe. I forget what the term is...its sort of the descriptive nature that is used lol. But, I don't wish to debate politics, and I'm not saying I agree or disagree with your statement. Just pointing it out for arguments sake :-p

In regards to UFOs, I think it is more complicated that just a simple belief structure being taken advantage of by a bunch of con men (though that element certainly exists).

@ Adam SI considered censoring the line re “Liar in Chief” from my friend’s reply to my Email on the UFO “Lies/liar’.In these times especially, most adults really don’t seem to give a hoot about UFOs , and from my experience, almost no one is really interested beyond a ‘cult following’ . I attended a few Stephen Basset “X Conferences” in DC area around the time he was involved in ‘politics’ and seriously, no problem finding a parking space - and no problem engaging the ‘stars’ face to face. Only me and Stanton Freeman in the ‘bookstore’ walking around having a friendly discussion on ‘the literature’ near 10 minutes ! Maybe three other people walked in ….but I’m rambling/ranting on.

There’s ‘politics’ at the top of the UFO subject ( re MUFON etc) which is really messing up the discussions as much as the lies and delusions in every ‘belief’ system debate - and those lies and delusions are being used by the ‘players’ at the top as much as they can and so it goes …and I agree it’s more complicated than this …

So I guess my song is as ’stupid as STRAWBERRY ice cream’ to some,and to others as stupid as a vanilla shake with calamari.

For others, interesting and curious ….maybe? gotta work on it.

and gotta find a tune for this:Can there really be a ‘left wing and a right wing’ in the UFO debate ?Yes Virginia, there are UFOs, so put that in your stocking and stuff it !LOL

So true about MUFON. I will say though, I do know a fair number of people in their thirties who are interested in UFOs (I’m 34 myself). BUT, they either subscribe firmly to the ETH or believe that all UFOS are just classified technology. There isn’t much in the way of middle ground.

Frankly, I didn’t realize that the phenomena is as complex as it is until I read “Messengers of Deception” by Vallee a couple of years back. And even then, I didn’t develop an appreciation for the intelligence ties until I read “Dulce Base” by Gabe Valdez….which pretty much shattered any lingering belief that there is anything truly metaphysical is going on, at least these days heh

For a unique ‘metaphysical’ understanding in a Jungian sense , David Halperin is the ‘go to’,retired Prof of Religion (will have book released in the coming year).

Meanwhile , has excellent blog and will answer any questions = Journal of a UFO Investigator

And again, the depth of the subject as myth and psychology are considered - ‘it works for me’in the area of ‘close contact’ and ‘true believers’, but again there are cases that are simply ‘too real’from the ‘evidence’ ( multiple witnesses unknown to each other, multiple military radars ) that even caused Jung to suspect ‘they’ were ‘real’. But Martians and Venusians - not in today’s world - seems to be technology ‘we have’ that cannot be revealed - whatever the reason ….fascinating subject on many levels - enjoy !

I myself am 40 and have been interested in the UFO phenomena since I read a book about them in 2nd grade. I don't remember much from that book other than an illustration of the aliens the Sutton's of Kelly, Kentucky described seeing in 1955. I was a proponent of the ETH and Ancient Alien hypotheses for a long time up until my early 30's.

Now, though I believe the phenomena is a genuine one, I think those hypotheses are not defensible. Vallee was also one of the reasons I started to change my mind, though he is not alone in helping me. The subject is extremely complex and the nuances can be subtle to the nth degree. Most who are interested seem to only allow for 3 or 4 possibilities regardless if the data at times contradicts and undermines one, more or all of them. I sincerely think, if myself or anyone else is interested in researching the phenomena, it would behoove them to drop their beliefs and their wants at the door. But at the same time I consider that is where many get trapped, myself included and may be I still am.

good advice, most folks want to be on some kind of a ’simple solid ground’ . I’m 70 and Vallee was also influence on me - first, Passport to Magonia.

I actually remember news on car radio upsetting my Mom about the UFOs over DC and near Norfolk VA as she asked my Dad (who was aircraft mechanic at Norfolk Naval Air Station )if he thought they were from ‘outer space’.He just laughed and said “I don’t know “.

Perhaps a solution is to divide the phenomena itself. Maybe the mistake we are all making is to pigeonhole one theory to explain all of it. Instead, we should dissect it: ("Summer of 47," "adduction accounts", "close encounters", "possible military tests", "confidence men",etc).

When studying architecture, do we look at the building as a whole, or do we go floor-by-floor?

"Here’s how I see it: Empathy is the ability to respect and maybe even understand another’s point of view, revealing larger truths about ourselves and others. Exploitation is the use of another’s experience for personal gain. Empathy requires self-awareness. Exploitation is marked by self-interest. Empathy is about deepening connections. Exploitation, about filling one’s pockets, literal or figurative."